As near as I can figure
it out, the current situation between the Israelis and the Palestinians
comes down to this: The government of Israel is demanding that the Palestinians
allow their homeland to be colonized, and that they do it without complaint.

That, anyway, seems to be the sum
and substance of all the to-ing and fro-ing about "settlements," which
are, in actuality, nothing more than colonial outposts planted in the midst
of a deeply embittered and hostile population.

Not surprisingly, this has not gone
down well with the Palestinians, who have been anything but uncomplaining
over the last nine months. Their new intifada, which has featured some
of themost gruesome and blood-curdling
acts of violence in recent memory, has been largely a sustained rebellion
against Israel's colonization of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

For all the feral viciousness of
the worst acts of violence against Israelis--the lynching of two Israeli
soldiers in Ramallah and the recent slaughter of two Israeli teenagers
near Bethlehem in the West Bank stand out--the Palestinians have fared
far worse in terms of numbers. At least 448 Palestinians have been killed
since the start of the rebellion, as compared with 100 Israelis (including
13 Israeli Arabs). And yet there has been no letup in the level of Palestinian
resistance to the Israeli occupation. On the contrary, it has escalated
in recent weeks.

That ought to be worrying to the
Israelis: such a willingness to die suggests that many Palestinians feel
they have nothing to lose. So, for that matter, does the resort to the
poor man's nuke, the suicide bomb.

And yet the Israeli government persists
in building and enlarging settlements. On Tuesday, the government's housing
minister announced plans for hundreds of new dwellings for Israelis on
the West Bank. This even as an American envoy, William Burns, was beginning
to try to get security talks going again between the two sides.

But for the fact that the United
States has been so deeply involved in the region over the years--as guarantor
of Israel's existence and security; as target of Arab anger and terror;
as a once and (one hopes) future broker of peace--most Americans would,
I suspect, remain as blissfully ignorant of the Middle East as of most
other parts of the world.

But ignorance and non-involvement
are not options at this late date, as the Bush administration has quickly
discovered. The only issue is what will be the character of America's involvement.

George W. Bush could do far worse
than to follow the example of his father, who during his term in the White
House laid down a marker with the government of Yitzhak Shamir by withholding
American loan guarantees for settlement-building in the occupied territories.

(Despite that show of resolve by
the elder Bush, the population of the Israeli settlements has roughly doubled
over the last decade, to 200,000.)

Ariel Sharon, the current Israeli
prime minister, not only seems committed to further colonization, but he
also appears convinced he can squelch the Palestinian uprising by the application
of superior force.

He is, of course, welcome to try
that--the Israeli public apparently is willing to tolerate it. But he is
not entitled to American support in that effort.

Happily, Secretary of State Colin
Powell already has spoken up once when Sharon went over the line by sending
troops into Palestinian territory and holding it. Sharon quickly reacted
by withdrawing.

Like his father before him, George
W. Bush must find a lever with which to exert pressure on Sharon over the
settlements. They are now, as they have been from the beginning, not just
an obstacle to peace, but an incitement to hideous violence. America must
not be a party to that incitement.